V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) CLASS IV employee of the Judgeship of District Kanpur Nagar have approached this Court questioning the validity of the order No. 46/10 dated 25/26.123.2010 issued by the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar wherein promotion has been accorded from Class IV to Class III to Respondent No. 4 to 12....
(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that Petitioners are Class IV employee working in District Judgeship of Kanpur Nagar. The Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were so appointed in January, 1981; the Petitioner No. 3 was appointed in October, 1982; the Petitioner No. 4 was so appointed in July, 1985; the Petitioner No. 5 was so appointed in November, 1985, the Petitioner No. 6 was so appointed in December, 1985; the Petitioner Nos. 7,8, and 9 were so appointed in August, 1987; the Petitioner Nos. 10,11 and 12 were so appointed in September, 1987; the Petitioner No. 14 was so appointed in September, 1998 and the Petitioner Nos. 15 and 16 were so appointed in October, 2001. Each of the Petitioner is in continuous service from the date of his initial appointment. All the Petitioners possessed requisite education qualifications for appointment against Class III post. Under a government order dated 31.8.1992 there exists a 15% quota for promotion from Class IV posts to Class III posts. Such quota has been reiterated by a subsequent government order dated 3.9.1995, which further makes provisions for an additional 5% quota to be filled up from amongst the Class IV employees possessing intermediate certificate examination. Petitioners claim that criterion for promotion is specified under U.P. Government Servant Criterion for Recruitment by promotion Rules, 1994 and the criterion provided therein seniority subject to rejection of the unfit. The district Judge, Kanpur Nagar notified a written examination for making promotion from Class IV to Class III posts. Such written examination was held on 27.4.2009. A total number of 43 candidates including the Petitioners participated in the written test held on 27.4.2009. After holding of the written examination no further steps were taken by Respondent authorities for finalizing the selection proceedings. The District Judge, Kanpur Nagar attained the age of superannuation on 15.2.2010. Consequent thereupon the District Judge was scheduled to be relieved from his office on 28.2.2010. After having attained the age of superannuation on 15.2.2010 the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar obtained a report from a Four member committee in the date of 25.2.2010 recommending the names of nine persons alleged to be in order of merit for promotion to Class III posts. The report of the Four member committee dated 25.2.2010 was accorded approval by the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar on 25.2.2010 itself and an order bearing No. 46/2010 dated 25/26.2.2010 was issued according promotion to the said nine persons. Out of the nine persons so approved for promotion Petitioners claim that six persons specified from serial No. 4 to 9 are much junior to the Petitioners. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 3 as well as on behalf of the contesting Respondents.
(3.) REJOINDER affidavit has been filed and thereafter, present writ petition has been taken for final hearing /disposal with the consent of the parties.;